PDA

View Full Version : Arbitrary use of decades beginning from 0 or 1 - Players of the decade.


Nathaniel_Near
09-26-2012, 02:08 PM
Nadal or Djokovic still have chances to become the greatest player of this decade (beginning 2010 or whatever). There is no guarantee that there will be other truly dominant forces in tennis for the rest of it, and it isn't like the current younger generations are exactly proving themselves to be future all conquering tyrants.

Currently for this period, Nadal has 5 Majors and Djokovic has 4.

Greatest players of decades seems to be a popular point of discussion here (for no particularly good reason). Given the poor state of logic and meaning in such a list, I would like to further accentuate the pointless and arbitrary premise by venturing into discussions on whether Nadal and Djokovic could indeed become the 'player of the current decade beginning from X'. It would be quite an achievement according to flawed human logic, as though a decade beginning from 0-1 constitutes a macro season.


Cheers, now please discuss!

cknobman
09-26-2012, 02:17 PM
So 2000-2009 goes to Federer.

Right now up to this point I would give 2010+ to Djokovic.

ledwix
09-26-2012, 06:21 PM
Everything in general is arbitrary. Language is a convenient formality. These words mean nothing to an alien, other animal, or anyone without knowledge of Roman characters or English. Life is a cultural program, a ceremonious ritual we all do in sequence because our emotions compel us to do so on a daily basis. As for the best player of the 2010s, I think it is Nadal by a hair right now but will end up being Djokovic. Then again anything is possible with the new players in the next seven years.

Mustard
09-26-2012, 06:37 PM
1880s: William Renshaw
1890s: Reggie Doherty
1900s: Laurie Doherty
1910s: Anthony Wilding
1920s: Bill Tilden
1930s: Ellsworth Vines
1940s: Jack Kramer
1950s: Pancho Gonzales
1960s: Rod Laver
1970s: Bjorn Borg
1980s: Ivan Lendl
1990s: Pete Sampras
2000s: Roger Federer
2010s: Rafael Nadal (so far)

NadalAgassi
09-26-2012, 06:47 PM
Even though Nadal has 1 more slam I would give Djokovic the edge for Player of the Decade at this point. Nadal hasnt even won a hard court Masters this decade, his only non clay titles above 500 level are the Wimbledon and U.S Open titles he won. Djokovic's 2011 overall eclipses Nadal's 2010, and Djokovic has been better than Nadal in 2 of the 3 years of the decade so far. Still a long way to go though.

kishnabe
09-26-2012, 07:48 PM
You never really know...if it would be Nadovic who would be the dominator of the 2010's.

People were thinking Hewitt and Safin would be dominating te 2000's.....did not happen but they had great sucess.

The middle 2010's could decide it....maybe it could be some new guy dominating while Djokdalray are tired from their grinding style.

Maybe Murray can dominate the next two season and come out on top.

smoledman
09-26-2012, 08:01 PM
I bet Murray ends up player of the 2010s.

90's Clay
09-26-2012, 08:01 PM
Gotta give it to Nadal.. If anything just for the fact he continues to rack up the Clay slams, and for his 2010 season. Winning 3 straight slams on 3 different surfaces.. I mean whens the last time thats been done?

Djoker's 2011 season deserves some praise but it still remains to be seen what he does from here on out.. Also while his 2011 season was awesome, he didn't manage the 3 slams in the same way Nadal did the year before on those 3 different surfaces.


But Nadal probably hold onto to it because the guy started way back in 2005 at the slams and he probably only has another 2-3 years TOPS at truly anything.. Maybe not even that.. So the player of the decade could switch once or twice

NLBwell
09-26-2012, 08:44 PM
1880s: William Renshaw
1890s: Reggie Doherty
1900s: Laurie Doherty
1910s: Anthony Wilding
1920s: Bill Tilden
1930s: Ellsworth Vines
1940s: Jack Kramer
1950s: Pancho Gonzales
1960s: Rod Laver
1970s: Bjorn Borg
1980s: Ivan Lendl
1990s: Pete Sampras
2000s: Roger Federer
2010s: Rafael Nadal (so far)

Vines in the 30's - interesting choice.

smoledman
09-26-2012, 08:52 PM
1930s - Don Budge or Fred Perry

Russeljones
09-26-2012, 11:01 PM
Even though Nadal has 1 more slam I would give Djokovic the edge for Player of the Decade at this point. Nadal hasnt even won a hard court Masters this decade, his only non clay titles above 500 level are the Wimbledon and U.S Open titles he won. Djokovic's 2011 overall eclipses Nadal's 2010, and Djokovic has been better than Nadal in 2 of the 3 years of the decade so far. Still a long way to go though.

What? Nadal has won all 4, end of argument.

paulorenzo
09-27-2012, 01:17 AM
What? Nadal has won all 4, end of argument.

in regards to the current decade, he hasn't, which was the NadalAgassi's subject at hand.

also both players have the chance to win all 4 in this decade, so the argument continues.

Russeljones
09-27-2012, 01:31 AM
Isn't it silly to talk about the 2010's decade when we're only in 2012?

paulorenzo
09-27-2012, 02:23 AM
Isn't it silly to talk about the 2010's decade when we're only in 2012?


no, since nobody was stating either player's results were absolute or conclusive. both are still able to up their resume.

"... I would give Djokovic the edge for Player of the Decade at this point." (post #5)

to analogize, is it silly to discuss who has a better start to the season after the AO? no, since we're only discussing who has the better start, not who's going to irrefutably have the year end no.1 in november.

you're the one placing an end-all-be-all on the subject, ending the argument by stating nadal has won all 4, which doesn't really apply to NadalAgassi's argument of Djokovic having a better decade, since nadal's feat has yet to happen in the time frame he was referring to. it seemed like an oversight on your part, i was merely pointing that out.

i dont think it's the best way to portray greats, especially ones like mcenroe or rafa who peak right at the turn of a decade. but NadalAgassi makes a valid, accurate claim that was pertinent to the thread. yours was not.

Nathaniel_Near
09-27-2012, 03:22 AM
no, since nobody was stating either player's results were absolute or conclusive. both are still able to up their resume.

"... I would give Djokovic the edge for Player of the Decade at this point." (post #5)

to analogize, is it silly to discuss who has a better start to the season after the AO? no, since we're only discussing who has the better start, not who's going to irrefutably have the year end no.1 in november.

you're the one placing an end-all-be-all on the subject, ending the argument by stating nadal has won all 4, which doesn't really apply to NadalAgassi's argument of Djokovic having a better decade, since nadal's feat has yet to happen in the time frame he was referring to. it seemed like an oversight on your part, i was merely pointing that out.

i dont think it's the best way to portray greats, especially ones like mcenroe or rafa who peak right at the turn of a decade. but NadalAgassi makes a valid, accurate claim that was pertinent to the thread. yours was not.

E-e-e-xactly. And when I said discuss earlier, I meant this as well as also discussing players achievements. I just find it interesting and curious how rankings by decade are often done and with the same starting point due to their perceived landmark status.

In a potential list like this, results would look different depending on the starting point of each repeating decade. Let's choose a number shall we, how about 7 or 8? In this case, Nadal would probably win the battle (Of course, merely speculation). Crafty, that!

I frown upon this thread and will vote my own creation with 1 star.

Peace out.

Monsieur_DeLarge
09-27-2012, 04:04 AM
I'm a bit of a numbers geek, so I did a wee bit of useless analysis and here's what I noticed:
(NB: all stats assume each decade starts at a zero year)



In the 1970s, four players won four or more slams: Borg (8), Newcombe (5), Connors (5), and Vilas (4); that's 22 slam titles won by the top players.

In the 1980s, four players won four or more slams: Lendl (7), Wilander (7), McEnroe (6), and Becker (4); 24 slam titles won by the top players.

In the 1990s, three players won four or more slams: Sampras (12), Agassi (5), and Courier (4); 21 slam titles won by the top players.

In the 2000s, two players won four or more slams: Federer (15), and Nadal (6); 21 slam titles won by the top players.

So far in the 2010s, two players have won four or more slams: Nadal (5), and Djokovic (4); 9 slam titles have been won by the top players.


What this pattern suggests to me is that in the next eight years (a) only one or two more players are likely to win at least four slams; (b) about 12-15 future slams are still to be won by those top three/four guys, whoever they are; and (c) it takes at least seven slams to be the decade's top player, so Nadal and Djokovic have not yet guaranteed themselves a shot at being the best of the 2010s.


Regards,
MDL

Disclaimer: I have used reasonable skill and care compiling this post, but make no warranty, express or implied as to the nature or accuracy of it and will not be liable for any loss which may arise from the use of information contained within. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The value of your investments may go down as well as up.

Mustard
09-27-2012, 08:29 AM
Vines in the 30's - interesting choice.

I have Vines as the best player in the world in 1932, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937 and 1938.

Ellsworth Vines in the 1930s
As an amateur
Won 1931 US Championships
Won 1932 Wimbledon
Won 1932 US Championships
Runner-up of 1933 Wimbledon

As a professional
Won 1934 Wembley Pro
Won 1935 French Pro
Won 1935 Wembley Pro
Won 1936 Wembley Pro
Won 1939 US Pro

Vines didn't play any tournament in 1937 and 1938, just the tours against Perry.

Vines:
Won 1934 World Pro Tour against Tilden (19 wins ahead after more than 50 matches)
Won 1935 World Pro Tour against Stoefen (25-1), and another tour against Nusslein (winning 3 out of 4 matches)
Won 1936 World Pro Tour against Stoefen (33-5)
Won 1937 World Pro Tour against Perry (32-29)
Won 1938 World Pro Tour against Perry (49-35)
Lost 1939 World Pro Tour against Budge (17-22)

Vines retired in 1940 to become a professional golf player.

Sabratha
09-27-2012, 08:39 AM
I think it's too early to decide who "won" the slams from this decade.